Why is Security so Difficult to Define - Coursework Example

Why is "security" so difficult to define? - Political Studies Introduction: The term is security has many connotations in the life of human beings and even among other life forms. Every individual life form and the group to which it belongs needs and craves for security. Higher life form other than the human being needs security for the purpose of continuity of the species rather than for individual members. But since homo-sapiens is the most advanced and complex living beings on the planet, security has come to have many connotations. Every individual human being needs security and hence will look for a career that can take care of his or her needs. Alternatively, a partner is sought, who can provide the same for that individual. The family that usually comprises the couple and their children needs security while living as a part of the society. The retired person needs financial security that will see them through their old age without being dependent on an absent or unwilling sibling. The society as a whole needs security from control over other alien societies. The religious beliefs that one follows need protection from influence and attack from other faiths and beliefs. Politically, every individual and the society as a whole need security from attack from other countries which includes protection from unacceptable forms of governance. The religious and multiracial mix seen in many advanced societies has also given rise to protection of individual and religious/racial sections within a society due to increasing levels of intolerance from other sections. Hence, the complexity of today’s world coupled with growing global interaction (intended and unintended) has made the issue of security quite complex and difficult to define. Old threats like direct attacks (traditional war) have sort of disappeared and are now replaced by new ones like terrorism and financial control. This paper is a review of security with regard to politics in today’s complex world. It is really an explanation as to why security in today’s world is difficult to define due to many factors. Various connotations of political security: It is interesting to note that the concept of political security has changed over the years. Ask a person a hundred years back about security and the reply would inevitably be blatant attack from another country. Probably, the earliest or even classical notion of security was the use of military force rather than on any ideology. “The classical definition of security studies is the study of the threat, use and control of military force” (Hentz & Bas 3). But this perception has changed to a large extent as the following views illustrate. In a sense, the word military force has been relegated to a position of lesser importance. David Lake (as quoted by de Mesquita et al) defines security with a dual point of view – “one, freedom from the risk of death or impairment from violence by those external to the state, and two, the ability to accumulate wealth free from external coercion” (Mesquita et al 498). This definition appears to give a broad picture of security, but the authors state that it should be narrowed down because of the following reason. A nation can attack another state as a deterrent to possible attack from the latter. For example, the hold that the erstwhile Soviet Union had over its satellite nations like Poland and East Germany can be justified according to this definition. The authors hence give their own definition (based on Morrow’s view) of security as “the ability to defend the status quo on issues where the state did not peruse change” (Mesquita et al 498). In other words, anything forced on a state or nation against its will and in instances where no change was intended can be said to be a lack of security for the nation and its people. In more primitive on non-nation societies, the concept of security would be free from attack of other tribes or civilizations. For example, the traditional tribal societies in Africa and the Middle East were often at war with each other. Even nomadic societies that had no particular area to rule or take control of attacked other tribes for their own security, for obtaining cheap labour and for reinforcement of their numbers. The slave trade that existed during the last few centuries is an example. The African tribesman was definitely insecure during this period and would find himself captured and be sent of as a slave to the United States or Europe. Hitler’s attack on the practically the rest of the world on the premise of the superiority of the Aryan race undermined the security of many countries in Western and Central Europe until the threat ended by the defeat of Germany and its partners in war by the Allied powers. Such blatant attacks on other nations have all but disappeared except in a few circumstances. The attack on Kuwait by Iraq was one of the few exceptions to today’s practice of restraint and reliance on cooperation rather than on force. Genocide and ethnic cleansing seen in the last decade in some parts of Europe and seen even now in parts of Africa are some the other connotations of security for the individual as well as the race/society. The United States military attack on Afghanistan can be justified to a certain extent as a fight against terrorism after the September 11 attacks, while its attack on Iraq has been criticized by the world as a misguided policy. The issue of security and terrorism will be death with in more detail in later sections of this paper. In all the above instances, the security of a nation and its individuals are compromised. The United Nations viewed security as a state of non-conflict between states (or countries) especially during the Cold War era. According to Weldes, the UN during the Cold War “expressed a statist definition of security that focused exclusively on interstate conflict. The end of the Cold War, however, unleashed a spiralling number of proposals and statements that called for shifting the definition of security away from states and towards individuals and peoples” (188). This viewpoint indicates that security is now focused on protection of individual and society rather than the security of a nation as a whole. In other words, the possibility of a nation attacking and conquering another nation is now very low. The new forms of threats like terrorism and even economic threat are now seen as an issue rather than wars and inter state conflict. Three perceptions of security has been provided above which indicate the difficulty in correctly forming a definition of the term. They are briefly reproduced here. One notion is that security is the ability of a nation to protect its interests from external threats and how well it can protect individual aspirations for wealth creation. Another view is that security exists when a nation can protect status quo especially when no change is pursued. The third view which shifted from interstate conflict is the ability of nations to protect its individuals and the society as a whole. The next sections focus on security issues during the Cold War era and after, namely terrorism and globalization. Cold War era and security: The Cold War era was dominated by two opposing and far reaching ideologies namely capitalism and communism. The former policy led by the United States was intent on dominance of capitalism and the removal of the treat from communism. The Soviet Union and its allies (especially China) was intent on propagation of communism as the ideal policy to rule a country and its society. But surprisingly, the period saw fewer conflicts than what is seen today. During that time there was a balance of power with both countries arming themselves heavily as a deterrent to attack from the other with the result that both did not take the first move towards a conflict. Security was of course an issue when USSR tried attacking Afghanistan in their efforts at spreading their ideology into Central Asia. According to some experts, lack of vision on the part of the United States had paved the way to the rise of one of the most feared security threats facing the world, namely the Taliban. The US helped arm a rebellion against Russian presence which got out of hand. Once the USSR left Afghanistan, this group took control over the country bringing in strict religious laws. Personal freedom was curtailed to a large extent especially in the case of women. Lack of security due to racial and ethnic issues: Many historians say that the new horrors against humanity was very much in existence during the Cold War era, but was overshadowed by discussions and theorizing about the spectre of a Third World War amongst the superpowers and their allies. So these acts of violence in fact received very little global attention during this time. As Jones & Kennedy-Pipe purport, “while the post-Cold War era may appear to be characterized by ‘new wars’, these conflicts, which have witnessed the horror of ethnic cleansing, mass rape and plight of refugees, as for example, in Bosnia and Kosovo, were actually foreshadowed by earlier confrontations” (Jones & Kennedy-Pipe 1). Religion and race plays an important role in security or lack of it. Conflicts as mentioned above in Bosnia/Kosovo are an example where the state itself perpetuates violence against its own people in the name of religion and race. This is another dimension to the issue of security. People fear violence from their own countrymen and government rather than from outside. The continuous violence seen in Israel and Palestine is another instance of lack of security for the local population. There are more examples of such reprisals and acts of violence in many parts of the world, but is not possible to provide examples due to constraints of space in this paper. Terrorism: Even though terrorism was active in many parts of Asia (India, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka are examples) it was only given importance after the magnitude of the September 11 attacks and the London underground bombings a few years later. The foreign policy of the world’s sole remaining superpower was unacceptable to many nations. Terrorist attacks are now the accepted way of reprisal and to make political statements by many of these groups and can be defined as “the use of covert violence by a group for political ends” (Juergensmeyer 124). Here, it is the innocent individual that is caught in the crossfire. The greatest concern is probably the suicide attacks, where a state or region is practically powerless to stop a determined attacker. Other security issues: Even though the concept of globalization has many benefits, it has also inherent issues of lack of security. A definition of the term is a “process whereby many social relations become relatively delinked from territorial geography, so that human lives are increasingly played out in the world as a single place” (Baylis & Smith). One aspect is the loss of jobs when corporations begin outsourcing jobs to regions where qualified and cheap labour exists. Another is outflow of capital to such markets resulting in lower investment and development in the home country. The benefits derived by the host country in terms of employment and investment are seen by some as a cultural security threat. Many accuse globalization for bringing about alien Western culture undermining social and cultural values in the host country. Human rights violations, racial and gender discrimination are other issues of lack of security. Conclusion: As seen from what has been mentioned above, security has too many dimensions that make it difficult to provide a precise definition. It can be security from external geographical threats, it can be financial and job security, it can be security from terrorist attacks, it can be security from religious and ethnic forces, or it can be security from social and cultural erosion. It can also be a combination of some or all of the above factors. The only common thread that runs through them is protection of a state. Some views add individuals and the society as well. But there is no consensus as to the source of threat that undermines security. so, a comprehensive definition may need to include all of the above issues mentioned and should cover protection of the state, the individuals, the different ethnic and religious groups, and the society as a whole. Even so, new issues may come up requiring additions to a very long and descriptive definition. Works Cited Baylis, John and Smith, Steve. The Globalization of World Politics - An Introduction to International Relations 2nd edn. New York: Oxford University Press, 2001. Hentz, James J and Bas, Morten. New and critical security and regionalism: beyond the nation state. Illustrated Edition: Ashgate Publishing, Ltd., 2002. Juergensmeyer, Mark. Terror in the mind of God: the global rise of religious violence. Illustrated 3rd edn: University of California Press, 2003. Jones, Clive and Kennedy-Pipe, C. International security in a global age: securing the twenty-first century. Illustrated Edition: Routledge, 2000. Mesquita et al. The logic of political survival. Illustrated Edition: MIT Press, 2005. Weldes, Jutta. Cultures of insecurity: states, communities, and the production of danger. Illustrated Edition: U of Minnesota Press, 1999. Read More